Skip to main content

About this Show

Piers Morgan Tonight

News/Business. (2012) New.




San Francisco, CA, USA

Comcast Cable

Virtual Ch. 759 (CNN HD)






America 20, Washington 8, Piers 8, Grover Norquist 7, Warren Buffett 6, Us 6, Rick Warren 6, Jay Carney 5, Citi 4, Schwab 4, Geico 3, Israel 3, Robert Reish 3, Lipper 2, Cialis 2, Volkswagen 2, Aleve 2, Gordon 2, Lustfully 2, Clinton 2,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  CNN    Piers Morgan Tonight    News/Business.  (2012) New.  

    November 27, 2012
    6:00 - 7:00pm PST  

that does it for this edition of "360." see you again 10:00 p.m. eastern, an hour from now. "piers morgan tonight" starts right now. tonight, battleground america. the looming fiscal cliff and the fight to save the economy. in his first interview since the big romney loss, i will ask reince priebus if his party is out of touch with the country. plus his plans to fix the gop. plus president obama's tax push. he wants the rich to pay up but is it fair? and one of the most
influential spiritual leaders in the world, america's pastor, rick warren. he was there at barack obama's first inauguration. will he be there again? we're talking politics, same sex marriage and the "two and a half men" star whose christian conversion has him attacking his own show. this is "piers morgan tonight." good evening. our big story tonight, countdown to financial doomsday, the fiscal cliff and the clock is ticking. 35 days left before this massive sweeping tax hike. america's now at the mercy of washington, hoping that both sides can end the fighting and make a deal. anti-tax champion grover norquist last night told me he's keeping republicans to the no tax increase pledge they made decades ago. but should his party back away from that promise? joining me in his first interview since the election, reince priebus, chairman of the republican national committee. welcome back, mr. priebus. how are you? >> doing great, piers. how are you? >> you have been keeping your head below the paraput since the shellacking you guys took in the
election. what is your reaction to the pretty poor defeat? >> well, i think that we got to look at everything that we're doing. i think that's what we have to do. i don't think you can draw any quick conclusions other than the fact that we lost and we know that. but i think in order to get back in the game, you've got to look at and do a full autopsy of what happened, what we did well, what we didn't do well, what we can do better in the next year with two governors' races coming up and two years later, then four years from now. so what we're going to do is we want to bring everyone together. leaders from across the country, to look at everything that we've done, come up with a game plan, sort of a four-year plan of what we can do in the communities, out there across america, to do a long sustained year by year campaign and operation, and learn from what obama did and then learn from some of our mistakes and keep doing some of the things that we've done well. >> with hindsight, was it a mistake to choose mitt romney as the republican nominee?
>> no, i don't think so at all. i think he would have made a great president. i think most people that were polled actually thought he would make a better president than even barack obama, but i think that what we saw in team obama was something that was pretty good in the sense of a four-year long campaign on the ground in the communities, something that we're going to look at doing as well. but there are other things at play, too. there's macro politics and microtargeting and everything in between. it's not something obviously that we can cover in a seven-minute interview, but i think that what we can conclude is that we've got to be better, and that's something that we're committed to doing and i think our grassroots and our donors are all committed to doing more and doing more of a sustained operation in the years to come. >> one of the big challenges that will be facing the gop now, of course, is the fiscal cliff. the new cnn/orc poll, when asked is the gop doing enough to cooperate with obama, 70% said
no, of americans, whereas when they asked if obama is doing enough to cooperate with the gop, 45% yes, 49% no. clearly the republicans are being predominantly blamed for the breakdown in bipartisanship in washington. the fiscal cliff is a classic opportunity, many would argue, to show the americans you've listened, you've changed, you're ready to do deals that are to the benefit of the american national interest. >> well, i mean, piers, look, the president's the leader of this country and he's got to lead and he's got to take control, and he's got to show the american people that he can put people together and a team together, meaning republicans and democrats, and come up with solutions but so far, piers, we don't even know what the president's plans are. he's done a good job of apparently making americans feel that that's the case, but what he hasn't done a good job is really leading with evidence and with substance on the table as far as what he would do. here's the problem, piers.
if we really want to have an honest discussion about where we're at in this country and this fiscal problem facing america, the reality is if you look at any chart, and you study any basic description of what's happening to this country, what you'll see is that as compared to revenue, our bigger problem in this country by far, by an astronomical amount, is what's happening with regard to the spending that's going on in washington. >> yes, yes, but hang on. let me jump in. >> but it's dishonest -- >> i've heard all this. i've heard all this. grover norquist -- >> but it's true. you can hear it a thousand more times. >> it may be true to republican party, but the reality is in the cnn/orc poll just taken -- >> i understand. >> hang on. hang on. would you prefer a budget plan with only spending cuts, 29%, would you prefer a mix of spending cuts and tax increases, 67%.
a thumping, thumping majority of americans would prefer to see cuts in spending and tax increases. but you republicans led by grover norquist are absolutely intransigent about allowing any raise in taxation, yet the american public want you to do it. >> listen, first of all, there's a lot of things you said that aren't true. >> well, name one. >> nobody is -- first of all, no one is opposed to increasing revenues by closing some loopholes, but they -- >> that wasn't what i said. hang on. that wasn't -- that was not what i said. that wasn't what i said. >> they want commensurate tax cuts -- >> hang on. you said what i said wasn't true. reince, come on. i have to stop you here. no. you can't put words in my mouth. you said what i said wasn't true, then you give a completely different answer to what i actually said. >> okay. listen, here's the issue.
the issue is if you took every dime of profit from every fortune 500 company in america, took it all, send it all to washington, you would run the federal government for six months. here's my point, piers. the point is it is absolutely intellectually dishonest to have a conversation about tax increases unless and until you talk about massive cuts in spending of the federal government, getting our spending to gdp ratio below 20%, it's about at 25% today, and my point is, is that the first problem is spending. and i don't think you can even get to a dishonest conversation about how tax increases is somehow going to resolve this problem, it's like going to the hospital with a broken leg, taking a punbunch of pain pillsd after a few hours, you still have the broken leg. you have to fix the broken leg,
piers. >> but the point i'm making to you is that in the cnn poll, it wasn't just about raising taxes. it's about a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. now, let me play a quote from jay carney talking about exactly what the president is offering. >> here's a fact. the president has on the table a proposal that reduces the deficit by $4 trillion, that does so in a balanced way, that includes substantial cuts to discretionary non-defense spending, over $1 trillion, it includes revenue and includes $340 billion in savings from our health care entitlement programs. >> fairly unequivocal, isn't it? it's a mixture of pretty substantial spending cuts and tax increases. >> we haven't seen the plan. i haven't seen the plan. i don't think the speaker -- >> are you accusing the president of lying? is the president lying? >> where is the plan?
>> is he lying? >> i don't think the plan's out there. i think jay carney might be but i don't see the plan. maybe they have a plan. >> jay carney is lying and he's the white house spokesman. >> no. >> they're lying, are they? >> i'm not saying that. piers, maybe they've got -- >> you just did. you just called him a liar. >> they haven't shared the plan with the american people. paul ryan and the republicans in congress have passed twice now and last year -- excuse me, two years ago as well, a ten year plan for a budget that deals with the ten-year debt window, that deals with the deficits, that deals with entitlement reform. we have done that time and time again. it's the democrats, it's the democrats and this president that haven't passed a budget in over three and a half years. for us to be lectured as far as budgetary discipline, piers, by the democrats is absurdity. we're the only ones that passed a budget in this country for the past three and a half years. it's the democrats that violated
the law and didn't do their job for the american people and it's the president that hasn't led this country and come up with a plan for the american people. jay carney might say hey, listen, we've got a plan and this is the plan. well then share the plan with the american people. then we can get somewhere in this country and we can actually tackle the spending and debt that's going to bankrupt us all. >> reince, if the plan is exactly as he has stated here, and it includes some tax increases as the vast majority, nearly two thirds, more than two thirds of the american public want, actually want, if that is on the table, why wouldn't the republicans sign up to it? >> listen, i don't know the details of what he's offering, piers. i'm not trying to hide behind any of it. i just can't actually have an intelligent conversation about a plan hypothetically that we haven't seen, that might include tax increases and might not and might include some deduction
loophole eliminations that we haven't seen. how can you have an intelligent conversation like this? you actually have to see a plan, you have to have a negotiation, you have to discuss these things and potentially an open forum, for the american people to make a decision. but right now from this president we don't have anything but talking points and apparently, jay carney's comments today at a press conference. >> if your plan had been so popular, though, you would have won the election and you lost badly. >> well, that's one -- that could be one -- that could be one issue but there's a lot of issues that were being discussed at the -- during the time of the election and there's a lot of reasons for losing and there's a lot of reasons for winning. but tax increases i'm sure on the ballot weren't a reason that we lost the election. >> let's move on to another subject today which is the ongoing battle between john mccain and a few senators and ambassador susan rice. there is a view that it's all
beginning to get a little too personal, a little too ugly. what is your opinion of it? >> well, listen, that's one of the things, national security, the decisions that have to be made in regard to the secretary of state, i'm going to leave that up to the leadership in our senate. >> it's good to see you again. i have actually missed you on the weairways, reince priebus. welcome back. take care. president obama is launching a full court press of bush era tax cuts are allowed to expire, it will cripple the economy. mr. kruger, welcome to you. >> thank you. >> is the president going to hold his nerve and increase taxes or is he going to be bullied off by the republicans to try and do a deal to avoid falling off the fiscal cliff? >> the president has been quite clear that he wants a balanced approach to our deficit
problems, that he wants higher revenue raised from increasing taxes for the top 2%, the most fortunate americans, and spending cuts so that we are on a fiscally sustainable path. >> but what happens if the republicans get to december 30th and say no deal? we are not going to sign up to anything that involves genuinely increasing taxation even for the 2%? what is plan b? >> well, first of all, i don't think that's in the country's best interest, and i think we've heard from republicans that they are finally talking about raising revenue from upper income families, so these are solvable problems and we are doing our best to try to solve them. >> right. but everyone is getting very tired of this groundhog day fiscal cliff scenario. i feel like i've been covering this my entire life. there's got to be a sense in washington of the public just
wanting this to be settled sooner rather than later. a show of bipartisan cooperation that actually gets things done. >> oh, i agree with that. congress set up this process to force themselves to make a decision, to reach a more sustainable set of policies, and that's what we're working towards. i think it will help the economy if we do reach reasonable agreement that is balanced, that raises revenue from the most fortunate americans and reduces our spending so we're growing the budget at a sustainable rate, and if we don't do that, the president has made it quite clear he's not going to sign an extension of the bush tax cuts for the upper income groups, and that would cause tremendous damage to the economy if we're pushed in a situation where all of the rates go back to their earlier levels. that would cause a big tax increase on middle class
families which the president has made quite clear he wants to protect. 98% of american families. so we're working very hard to try to address these problems so that the typical middle class family won't see a $2200 tax increase next year. >> i interviewed grover norquist yesterday, who is still maintaining that a pledge is a pledge is a pledge, and that the republicans who are beginning to slightly jump over the ship are betraying their own pledges and shouldn't be doing this. what do you feel about grover norquist and his implacable opposition to raising taxes which seems to have been the mantra for so many republicans for so long? >> i'm an economist and to me, the solution to our problems is quite clear. we should pursue as the president has proposed a balanced approach. we had higher tax rates for upper income families in the 1990s and the economy did quite well. we added 23 million jobs and had
a budget surplus at the end of the 1990s. so this view that raising tax rates for the most fortunate 2% of families back to where they were during the clinton years would hurt the economy, i think is just plain wrong. >> thank you for joining me. i appreciate it. >> thanks for having me. coming next, battleground america. i talked to two top business experts with very different views on the fiscal cliff and how to save the economy. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 let's talk about low-cost investing. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 at schwab, we're committed to offering you tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 low-cost investment options-- tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 like our exchange traded funds, or etfs tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 which now have the lowest tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 operating expenses tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 in their respective tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 lipper categories. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 lower than spdr tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and even lower than vanguard. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550
tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 that means with schwab, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 your portfolio has tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 a better chance to grow. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and you can trade all our etfs online, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 commission-free, from your schwab account. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 so let's talk about saving money, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab etfs. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 schwab etfs now have the lowest operating expenses tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 in their respective lipper categories. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 call 1-800-4schwab tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 or visit tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 to open an account today. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 funding is easy tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab mobile deposit. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 investors should consider tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 carefully information d#: 1-800-345-2550 contained in the prospectus, d#: 1-800-345-2550 cluding investment objectives, d#: 1-800-345-2550 risks, charges, and expenses. d#: 1-800-345-2550 you can obtain d#: 1-800-345-2550 a prospectus by visiting tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 please read the prospectus tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 carefully before investing. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 at legalzoom, we've created a better place to handle your legal needs. maybe you have questions about incorporating
a business you'd like to start. or questions about protecting your family with a will or living trust. and you'd like to find the right attorney to help guide you along, answer any questions and offer advice. with an "a" rating from the better business bureau legalzoom helps you get personalized and affordable legal protection. in most states, a legal plan attorney is available with every personalized document to answer any questions. get started at today. and now you're protected. [ gordon ] for some this line is a convenience. how you doing today? i'm good thanks. how are you? i'm good. [ gordon ] but for others, it's all they can afford. every day nearly nine million older americans don't have enough to eat. anything else? no, not today. join me, aarp, and aarp foundation in the drive to end hunger by visiting
it's a little funny to watch a senator or congressman who got himself elected by promising the citizens of his state that he would go to washington to reform government, not raise taxes to paper over problems, deciding that when they haven't done that and the going gets rough, that they have an argument with me?
>> anti-tax champ grover norquist with me last night. republicans are keeping their no-tax promise but is the fiscal cliff a game change sner with me, robert reish, author of "beyond outrage" and business strategist and author, carol roth. welcome to you both. let me start with you, carol. here's what i don't get when i talk to the republicans, particularly the grover norquist gang. when you have an intransigent utterly implacable position like a pledge, there will be no tax increase come what may, it just seems to me looking on the outside as a brit, educate me about this, a ridiculous thing to do when you have no idea what may happen next. >> i don't disagree with that. i don't know that i would have ever signed that pledge but they have that pledge in place. i think that that's not the crux of the issue, though, piers. the crux of the issue is in terms of raising taxes, will that fix the problems of the
united states, and it absolutely will not. the fact of the matter is we have a crazy amount of debt and we have an economy that's not growing. so does raising taxes fix the spending problem, no. and will it get the economy going, no. so regardless of pledge or no pledge, i don't have a horse in this race, i'm part of the common sense party here, we have to fix the problem and raising taxes doesn't fix that problem. >> warren buffett came out this week and said the exact opposite. no disrespect to you but he's worth $40 billion and is considered to be the most successful investor in the history of mankind. he says throughout his life, throughout his career, there have been many periods with much higher tax rates, it's never made a dicky bird's difference to people's willingness to invest and that the combination of reduced spending and a few higher taxes for the wealthier people in america is the perfect answer. i just don't get a coherent argument why you can't do a bit of both.
>> here's the issue, is that we have never had a period with more than 1% of the gdp in terms of tax hikes since 1969. that was the last time that happened and that put us into a recession and then we had several decades of increasing unemployment. the amount of tax hikes we're talking about here, piers, are about 3% of the gdp. so you're comparing apples to oranges. you can't say well, under clinton, this didn't happen. that was less than 1% of the gdp. we're talking three times that in the situation that we're in today, having a 3% increase in taxes as a percentage of the gdp will throw us back into a recession. does that make sense? >> robert reish -- i'll ask robert reish. he's the perfect guy to ask. what do you think, robert? >> i don't think that's correct. we do have a huge budget deficit. i don't think taxes should be increased on the middle class but we have an almost record percentage of total national income going to the wealthiest 1% of americans. i don't see why they should be
let off the hook. why shouldn't they pay their fair share? they are paying a lower tax rate today and effective -- >> that doesn't solve the problem. >> -- in about 80 years and it will help solve the problem because that means more revenues into government. almost everybody, everybody who has looked at this issue, common sense party people, will say that you've got to have some balance between spending cuts and tax increases, particularly on the wealthy. i don't see what the problem is. we had a tax increase on the wealthy in the clinton administration, the economy did tremendously well. we had a tax cut particularly on the wealthy in the bush administration, the george w. bush administration, and very few jobs were created and the median wage started to drop, and that ended in the great recession. i don't think there's any correlation between raising taxes on the rich and economic growth or lack of economic growth. >> under president clinton, we had an increasing national debt for every single year with the exception of his last year. every single year, the national debt increased.
the only reason we have this surplus farce is because we're counting the amount we took in from social security. that should be off the table entirely. it's something different. that was included in the general fund. if you backed out social security, he would have ran a deficit. so that is one of the imaginary tales that people are telling to try and sell this tax increase. fundamentally, increasing taxes right now and i'm not talking about forever, i'm talking about today, in the state of our economy today, would put us back into recession and it would be detrimental for everybody. so let's take it off the table for today. >> on that point, carol, warren -- >> if i may, piers, i just don't understand that point because again, i understand why we don't want to raise taxes on the middle class, the vast middle class, because their spending is important, a lot of people are very hard up. the median wage has declined substantially over the past 30 years. in fact, it's 8% adjusted for inflation below what it was in 2000. but in terms of the very wealthiest members of this
society or you know, raising marginal income taxes just on income in excess of $250,000, that is not going to put a crimp on this economy. it is going to be helpful with regard to deficit reduction. it is not going to slow the economy down. >> let me jump in. let me jump in. let me jump in. let me jump in. carol, the point is that warren buffett was very explicit about this, that the wealthier people in america, the top 2%, if they were taxable, it wouldn't make an iota of difference to any of their investment plans whatsoever. so basically, you're just getting extra revenue with no pain, no negative, no downside whatsoever. says warren buffett. >> oh, come on. first of all, warren buffett has other issues at hand. the reality is he's not holding the government to the same standards he would hold his investments. to cast that aside for a second, the problem is, piers, is the amount that we're talking about. when we look at for example the payroll tax cut and the obama
care tax, if you put those two things together, that's over 1% of the gdp. if you throw in then the top 1% or 2% earners, that's going to put is at 1.5% or 2% of the gdp which is not a sustainable amount of tax hikes given the fact that we're in a sluggish growth period. i think that warren buffett certainly understands that. you know what mr. buffet chld tchldt, if you want to add in more refr new, go ahead. why not make this something of choice. if you feel like you can help, go ahead. put some extra money in. >> that's completely -- look, nobody has any guns to anybody's head. we have a common problem. it's called a budget deficit, particularly in out years. we have some common responsibilities and when you do consider that the wealthy in this country are taking home between 20% and 25% of total income, total wealth of this country, we haven't seen this
degree of concentrated income and wealth in 80 years. if i may just finish my thought for just a second. >> i'm afraid i have to jump in. >> the effective tax rate is lower than it's been in 50 years. >> we've run out of time. the good news is, that was a terrific debate. we've got 35 days left. i will bring you both back and we will carry it on. thank you both very much. >> thanks very much. coming up, america's pastor rick warren joins me live to talk politics, faith, same sex marriage and much more. that's next. our abundant natural gas is already saving us money, producing cleaner electricity, putting us to work here in america and supporting wind and solar. though all energy development comes with some risk, we're committed to safely and responsibly producing natural gas. it's not a dream. america's natural gas... putting us in control of our energy future, now.
why they have a raise your rate cd. tonight our guest, thomas sargent. nobel laureate in economics, and one of the most cited economists in the world. professor sargent, can you tell me what cd rates will be in two years? no. if he can't, no one can. that's why ally has a raise your rate cd. ally bank. your money needs an ally. those little things for you, life's about her. but your erectile dysfunction - that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure.
do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial.
we're grateful to live in this land, a land of unequalled possibility, where the son of an african immigrant can rise to the highest level of our leadership. >> pastor rick warren at president obama's inauguration in 2009. he's been called america's pastor and considered to be one of the most influential men in the world both as a religious leader and philanthropist. he's the author of "the purpose driven life" now marking its tenth anniversary and sales of over 32 million copies. rick warren joins me now.
that must be even to you pretty staggering, isn't it? 32 million copies? >> nobody's more surprised than i am. actually, i don't think actually anybody bought them. my mom and i gave them all away, all 32 million copies. >> we've had a great debate tonight about this fiscal cliff and really it comes down to this. whether the wealthier 2% of americans should be paying a bigger share of taxation. republicans almost to a man or woman seem utterly opposed to this, but warren buffett, the richest guy in america, is advocating that's exactly what should happen. you are somebody who's interesting to me because you give away 90% of all your earnings and you famously do that and you have given away millions as a result. what do you think? i'm assuming you would be in the wealthiest who should give away more, right? >> yeah. i actually think it's better for people to give it away than for it to be taken away. i would maybe disagree with both sides and say i would like to
see a tax code that rewards generosity, that rewards behavior that causes people -- see, piers, if somebody taxes me to do good, i don't get any credit for it. it's not my -- it's not my volunteerism involved. on the other hand, if you incentivize people to be generous which by the way, america is by far the most generous nation in the world, and one of the reasons for it is actually the tax code. there are countries that are not very generous because people don't have actually that much to give. so i would love to see -- one of the things they're talking about right now is well, we don't want to raise taxes so we will lower deductions. maybe we'll lower deductions on for instance charitable giving. what does that do? it stymies the behavior we actually want to support, that we want to favor, which is teaching people to be more generous. that's good for the heart.
>> i actually think that's a really good point. i think that that is the last thing they should be doing. they should make it as you say more incentivizing thing to give money to charities because that's actually, as you say, it makes you feel better, doesn't it? just writing a check to the government. >> it's good for character and as you said, i don't get any reward for being taxed to help other people. clearly the scripture says that people who have more are to help those who have less. actually, the purpose of influence is to speak up for those who have no influence. i find that often both sides will agree on the ultimate goal which is to help people. the problem is the dividing over what's the best method to do that. and when we start, you know, denying each other's motivations or questioning each other's motivations and why you do what you want to do, you know, piers, the bottom line is in america,
everybody really wants the same thing. everybody in america wants good health care -- wants their kids to be healthy. everybody wants their family to be safe. everybody wants the freedom to believe and live as they want to believe and live. everybody wants our nation to be secure. everybody wants to have peace. everybody wants to have prosperity. the debates are always over how, how do you get there. and when we disagree on the how, what often happens, i saw this happening, to me it was very disappointing in the last election cycle, is that people start questioning other people's motives because they have a different method than yours. i happen to know both republicans and democrats who are quite patriotic, and to question their patriotism because they believe a different method of getting to the goal that we all agree on to me seems a little disingenuous. >> have you ever known america
to be so divided, politically in particular, with washington, approval ratings for everyone in washington are at record lows. but it does seem to be particularly poisonous. i thought this election campaign really plummeted new depths on occasion. >> as you know, it was reported that i canceled the saddleback civil forum on the presidency for this very reason. early in the election cycle, before the republican candidate had even been chosen, both sides talked to me about doing the civil forum again, and it was well received the last time, four years ago, and i thought well, okay, i'll think about it. but i just found that to be honest with you, in my personal opinion, neither side was really presenting a compelling vision of the future because there was so much negativity over the other guy as a jerk. we spent $2 billion on this
election and literally, nothing changed. we have the same white house, we have the same congress and we have the same senate and i'm going what was that all about. was that really necessary, did that really prove the value of negative ads, did that really prove the value of demeaning somebody else simply because they disagree with you. you know, this goes back to the whole issue of tolerance. tolerance used to mean i respect you and i treat you with dignity and i could even love you, even though i may violently disagree with you. i totally disagree with what you say but you're a child of god so i will treat you with respect and dignity. now, tolerance has changed in meaning. today, mean people actually think tolerance means you must agree with me and if -- unless you agree with me, then you are intolerant. in other words, if they don't understand the difference between tolerance and approval.
if i were to say, let me just say this. if i were to say i believe everybody in america should be baptized, in fact, i think you should be baptized and you must accept that as a part of your lifestyle, then if you said to me well, rick, i don't think that's right, i happen to disagree with you, it would be nonsense for me to say to you well, piers, you're a bigot or you're hateful or you're afraid of me. it's just not true. you just happen to disagree. >> look -- >> if you only love people you agree with, you're not going to love anybody. because even your wife disagrees with you a lot of the times. >> my wife disagrees with me almost all the time. let's take a break. we will come back and explore tolerance because i will put you to the test. there are a few things i want to talk to you about in which i strongly disagree with you. >> that's fine. [ male announcer ] it's that time of year again.
time for citi price rewind. because your daughter really wants that pink castle thing. and you really don't want to pay more than you have to. only citi price rewind automatically searches for the lowest price. and if it finds one, you get refunded the difference.
just use your citi card and register your purchase online. have a super sparkly day! ok. [ male announcer ] now all you need is a magic carriage. citi price rewind. buy now. save later. cool, you found it. wow. nice place. yeah. [ chuckles ] the family thinks i'm out shipping these. smooth move. you used priority mail flat-rate boxes. if it fits, it ships for a low, flat rate. paid for postage online and arranged a free pickup. and i'm gonna track them online, too. nice. between those boxes and this place, i'm totally staying sane this year. do i smell snickerdoodles? maybe. [ timer dings ] gotta go. [ male announcer ] priority mail flat rate boxes. online pricing starts at $5.15. only from the postal service.
side by side so you get the same coverage, often for less. that's one smart board. what else does it do, reverse gravity? [ laughs ] [ laughs ] [ whooshing ] tell me about it. why am i not going anywhere? you don't believe hard enough. a smarter way to shop around. now that's progressive. call or click today. [ grunting ]
about 2% of americans are
homosexual, are gay, lesbian people. we should not let 2% of the population determine to change the definition of marriage. god created marriage for the purpose of family, love and procreation. >> pastor rick warren speaking out against same sex marriage. i'm back with him now. so let's talk about gay marriage for a moment because clearly, a number of states in america are moving to legalize this, and it's becoming less and less of a kind of hot button issue and more of a sort of inevitable change in social times. your position has remained pretty entrenched about this. here's my issue with it. unless i'm wrong, and clarify this for me, you base your opposition to it on the literal interpretation of what the bible says about marriage. am i right? >> yeah, that's true. everybody has a source of authority for their lives. some people, the source of authority is culture. some people, their source of authority is philosophy.
everybody has a world view. my world view simply happens to be based on a literal and strict interpretation of scripture. not everybody's interpretation but it is mine. >> right. here's my problem. i'm a catholic like you, and i respect the bible enormously and i respect actually all religious beliefs from everybody. here's my problem with taking the literal interpretation of the bible to the modern era and not allowing yourself to move with the times. it's this. there are so many things in the bible which are plainly ridiculous these days, right? children, you curse their parents will be put to death. there would be no children left over the age of 8 in america, right? with the possible exception of yours. if you commit adultery, you will be put to death. you yourself in an interview with ann curry on nbc which i remember watching, you admitted you have looked lustfully at
women but never sealed the deal. if you look lustfully at women according to matthew 5:28, i tell you anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. then leviticus says if you commit adultery, you should be put to doeath. you will have to stone yourself if you take the bible literally. >> i know where you're going with this. this is a very common misunderstanding on the laws of scripture, piers. there aren't just one set of laws in scripture. there are actually three sets of laws and they are not equally binding. many people think every law in the bible is the exact same kind of law. in the bible, there are three kinds of laws. there are civil laws, which by the way apply only to the nation of israel. those are called civil laws. there are ceremonial laws which are the laws that apply to cleanliness as kosher jews would practice today, in the laws of
leviticus, the priestly laws, ceremonial laws involve worship, then there are moral laws. as a christian, i'm not bound by the civil laws given to the nation of israel, and i'm not even bound by the ceremonial laws given to the priesthood of israel. i am bound, i believe, to the moral laws. the ten commandments are neither civil laws nor ceremonial. those are moral laws. they were the ones chiselled in stone. so when people -- it's a very common argument. yeah, but what about this law and what about this law. well, granted, that was that law for that point in time, and i'm under no obligation to do that. but when a law says for instance you will always tell the truth, you may not lie, sorry, that doesn't matter how times change. >> here's my confusion about you. because you have been with your wife kay, extremely generous in tackling things like aids. you have given millions to helping fight aids. >> with gay organizations all
around the world. >> right. right. so you clearly have no problem with gay people per se. yet you want to prevent them having the same rights to get married as straight people. that leads me to i suppose a more obvious supplementary question. do you personally believe that gay people are born gay? or do they become gay? are they made gay? >> yeah. yeah. you know what, i think the jury's still out on that. it wouldn't bother me if there was quote, a gay gene found, because here's what we know about life. i have all kinds of natural feelings in my life and it doesn't necessarily mean that i should act on every feeling. sometimes i get angry and i feel like punching a guy in the nose. it doesn't mean i act on it. sometimes as you pointed out, sometimes i feel attracted to women who are not my wife. i don't act on it. just because i have a feeling doesn't make it right. not everything natural is good
for me. >> but that's why, rick, that's why i have to jump in again. that is why this is such an interesting debate, because i just believe fundamentally and passionately that gay people are born gay. i don't think you become gay. and i think if you were able to convince yourself that they were born gay, you would see it differently. you would see it as a natural condition that people are gay, and then you may change your mind about their rights to have the same fundamental rights as straight people. but if you still believe that they're not born gay but become or get turned gay, then i can see that you can hide behind that as the justification, if you like, for not endorsing same sex marriage. >> i do not believe attraction is a sin, but i do believe that some actions are sin. i'm not responsible for all of my attractions. we know, for instance, that some
people are born with natural predispositions toward certain things, either good or bad. every one of us have those. i may not -- i'm automatically attracted to certain kinds of art, certain kinds of music, certain kinds -- i don't think that's a matter of right or wrong. but the bible clearly states that i am absolutely in control of my actions, and since i have chosen as my authority for my life not the government, not common culture -- by the way, i appreciate the way you're developing this right now because this is the very kind of discussions that we need to be having that are saying, that treat everybody with dignity, that treat everybody with love, but could disagree on certain issues and still say you know what, i don't agree with that guy but i think he has come to his position from his background and from his basis.
>> rick, i want to take a short break. let's continue this after the break. and also talk about this fantastic story today, angus jones from "two and a half men" who described his own show as complete filth. want to know if you agree with him. [ female announcer ] you can make macaroni & cheese without freshly-made pasta. you could also cut corners by making it without 100% real cheddar cheese. but wouldn't be stouffer's mac & cheese. just one of over 70 satisfying recipes for one from stouffer's.
♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] everyone deserves the gift of all day pain relief. this season, discover aleve. all day pain relief with just two pills. this season, discover aleve. a hybrid? most are just no fun to drive.
now, here's one that will make you feel alive. meet the five-passenger ford c-max hybrid. c-max says ha. c-max says wheeee. which is what you get, don't you see? cause c-max has lots more horsepower than prius v, a hybrid that c-max also bests in mpg. say hi to the all-new 47 combined mpg c-max hybrid.
well that was uncalled for. folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico sure are happy. how happy, ronny? happier than gallagher at a farmers' market. get happy. get geico. chances are, you're not made of money, so don't overpay for motorcycle insurance. geico, see how much you could save. hurry in and try five succulent entrees, like our tender snow crab paired with savory garlic shrimp. just $12.99. come into red lobster and sea food differently. and introducing 7 lunch choices for just $7.99.
we'll see discuss be like i can be a christian and be on a show like "two and a half men." you cannot. you cannot be a true god fearing person and be on a television show like that i know i can't. i am not okay with what i'm learning what the bible says and being on that television show. >> angus t. jones, young star of "two and a half men," attacking his own show, calling it filth and saying it goes against his christian values. >> he has now recanted and apologized i suspect at the behest of his publicist and employers. he felt very compromised about his new christian beliefs in terms of what he has done on the show. the show to most people is a bit
of fun comedy. do you think he's taking it too far? what would you council him? >> well, i don't really know his motivation behind it, so i would -- i would like to talk to him first before i would comment on his issue. i would say, and i think pretty mush there is is agreement, that there has been a coarsenning of our culture over generations and generations. things that used to happen in college, you know, filtered down to high school level into the junior high level. i was talking to somebody today just in the green room and they were telling me their grade school teacher was asked -- asked everybody in the class to write a letter on friendship. an essay on friendship. this is a group of fifth graders and one of the girls wrote an essay on friends with benefits on the concept of having sex with whoever you want to. this is a girl in the fifth grade. obviously, things are getting -- the standards of morality seem
to be going lower and lower in our culture. and another thing that's happening is that the internet has definitely increased the level of rudeness in our society. we are losing, piers, the civility in our civilization. it's very easy to hide behind a screen and to lob emotionally loaded words and attacks although people without even -- you know, in the protection of your own security of your home, and i -- i would love to see libra rals, conservatives, jews, gays, straights, to start a coalition to end stereotyping. >> i agree with that. but i have to be sterste stereo and bloody rude to you. i enjoyed the conversation. please come back and discuss it
in more depth soon. >> i enjoyed it. >> the book is on sale now. very good to finally get to interview you. i enjoyed it. >> thanks, piers. >> my thanks to pastor rick warren. e forever. i wish this test drive was over, so we could head back to the dealership. [ male announcer ] it's practically yours. test drive! but we still need your signature. volkswagen sign then drive is back. and it's never been easier to get a jetta. that's the power of german engineering. get $0 down, $0 due at signing, $0 deposit, and $0 first month's payment on any new volkswagen. visit today. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] you've been years in the making. and there are many years ahead.
join the millions of members who've chosen an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. go long.